Instrumental processes, based on the idea that individual perceptions of safety climate inform behavior outcomes expectancies (Zohar, 2008), and reciprocation processes, based on social exchange theory ... [more ▼]

Instrumental processes, based on the idea that individual perceptions of safety climate inform behavior outcomes expectancies (Zohar, 2008), and reciprocation processes, based on social exchange theory (Blau, 1964), have been identified as important processes to take into account in order to understand safety behaviors (Chmiel & Hansez, 2016). The main aim of this study is to go further in the explanation of the processes linking perceived management commitment to safety (PMCS) to safety behaviors, by testing the moderating role of two variables reflecting the way workers perceive their supervisor: safety specific trust in the supervisor, illustrating instrumental processes and perceived supervisor support (PSS), illustrating reciprocation processes. In two samples, a survey methodology and Latent Moderated Structural (LMS) equation modelling were used to test our hypotheses. Overall, and although results were mixed and discussed, high PMCS, when combined with high trust or high PSS, resulted in safer behaviors. We did not find such significant effects as explaining routine violations. The patterns of results were similar in the two samples. The main limitations are the use of single-source and self-reported data may lead to common-method variance bias and the cross-sectional nature of the study. Future longitudinal research is needed to test causality. An important implication for companies is to be aware of the powerful role played by management: building trusting relationship (by behaving consistently regarding safety) and encouraging managers to show support to their employees in a context where safety is considered as important are keys to potentially achieve safe behaviors. [less ▲]

This study is a first step towards addressing the development of Situational Judgment Tests (SJTs) for the assessment of Organizational Citizenship Behaviours (OCB). Based on relevant best practices and ... [more ▼]

This study is a first step towards addressing the development of Situational Judgment Tests (SJTs) for the assessment of Organizational Citizenship Behaviours (OCB). Based on relevant best practices and recommendations from the literature, two distinct SJTs were specifically developed to comply with OCB assessment. The two SJTs differ with respect to their degree of job specificity. Data were collected through online surveys on two different samples (220 white-collar professionals and 139 university students). Concurrently, OCB were collected using self-reported measurement scales. The findings provide some empirical evidence to support the appropriateness of using SJTs as an alternative means to assessing job applicants’ propensity to exhibit OCB. [less ▲]

Two studies investigate whether employees viewing discretionary safety activities as part of their job role (termed safety citizenship role definitions, SCRDs) plays an important part in predicting two ... [more ▼]

Two studies investigate whether employees viewing discretionary safety activities as part of their job role (termed safety citizenship role definitions, SCRDs) plays an important part in predicting two types of safety violation: routine violations conceptualized as related to an individual’s available cognitive energy or ‘effort’; and situational violations, which are those provoked by the organization (Reason, 1990). Study 1 showed SCRDs predicted situational violations only, and partially mediated the relationships between Perceived Management Commitment to Safety (PMCS) and work engagement with situational violations. These findings add to those by Hansez and Chmiel (2010), showing that routine and situational violations have predictors that differ. Study 1 findings also extend research reported by Turner et al. (2005), by showing that the effect of Job Control on SCRDs was mediated by both PMCS and work engagement. In study 2, participation in discretionary safety activities (safety participation) mediated the relationship between SCRDs and situational violations. Similar to study 1 The link between SCRDs and routine violations was non-significant and, strikingly, so was the link between safety participation and routine violations. These results support the view that processes involving SCRDs and safety participation are not cognitive-energetical in nature. In addition, study 2 findings extend previous work by Neal and Griffin (2006) by showing that SCRDs and safety knowledge partially mediated relationships between safety motivation and safety participation, whereas the direct effect of safety motivation on safety participation was non-significant. The results from both studies support the view that SCRDs are important in predicting situational violations. In study 2 SCRDs were shown to partially mediate the relationship between safety motivation and selfreported participation in discretionary safety activities (Safety Participation) which, in turn, related to situational violations. Interestingly there was no significant direct link between SCRDs and situational violations. These findings support the view that the effect of SCRDs on situational violations is fully mediated by participation in discretionary safety activities. [less ▲]

Since Hofmann, Jacobs and Landy (1995) emphasized the need to consider the influences of socio-organizational factors on safety, several studies have invoked psychological processes in order to interpret ... [more ▼]

Since Hofmann, Jacobs and Landy (1995) emphasized the need to consider the influences of socio-organizational factors on safety, several studies have invoked psychological processes in order to interpret the relationships they identified between such organizational factors and safety outcomes. However, studies measuring effectively such psychological processes are quite scarce. Four distinct psychological processes have been identified as fundamental to predict safety behaviors: cognitive, motivational, instrumental and social exchange processes. Hansez and Chmiel (2010) have applied the job demands resources model (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007) to the safety domain, identifying 3 different safety specific (instrumental) and non-safety specific (cognitive and motivational) psychological processes explaining safety violations. Our main aim is to integrate the four psychological processes, but also in-role and extra-role safety behaviors to the same model. More specifically, we aim at replicating Hansez and Chmiel’s (2010) results on a different sample and integrating safety-specific social process to the model. 1,922 workers (71% response rate) returned a questionnaire including validated scales measuring job demands (work overload and role ambiguity), job resources (job quality, decision latitude and work support), job strain, job engagement, perceived management commitment to safety, routine and situational violations, safety participation and safety citizenship role definitions (SCRDs). Data were analyzed using structural equation modelling and bootstrapping. Results showed that, as expected, our model followed the same patterns as Hansez and Chmiel’s (2010) model, confirming the importance of cognitive-energetical, motivational and instrumental processes in the prediction of safety violations. Moreover, perceiving management as committed to safety leads workers to define discretionary safety behaviours as part of the job, which is linked to corresponding discretionary behaviours. Participating in such discretionary activities, in turn, leads to (1) lower situational violations, but also to (2) lower routine violations. These results confirm the importance of safety-specific social exchange processes in the prediction of safety violations. Thus, it appears that different processes of reaction to working conditions can impact employee’ safety behaviors. On the one hand, situational violations are impacted by motivational process, as job resources encourage employees to be stimulated by their job, by instrumental process, as perceiving management as committed to safety is directly associated with lower situational violations, and by social process stemming from job resources (i.e. job resources allow employees to perceive their management as committed to safety, and they reciprocate this interest by defining safety as a part of their role, what encourage them to participate to discretionary safety activities). On the other hand, routine violations are impacted by the same social exchange (although to a lesser extent) and motivational processes, but also by cognitive process, as demanding working conditions may provoke job strain, associated with more “corner-cutting”. A practical implication for companies who want to reduce safety violations is to consider safety-specific and non-safety specific processes together. That is, they can try to improve working conditions considered as job resources, but need to keep in mind that these resources determine more complex safety-specific social exchange processes, through the crucial influence of management. [less ▲]

Despite a rapid growth and an ongoing need for outplacement services, little is yet known about the perceived adequacy and benefits of these services for redundant employees using them. We surveyed 360 ... [more ▼]

Despite a rapid growth and an ongoing need for outplacement services, little is yet known about the perceived adequacy and benefits of these services for redundant employees using them. We surveyed 360 Belgian redundant employees (i.e., clients) using outplacement services provided by a public employment agency. The results indicate that an outplacement experience perceived as adequate for clients fosters their overall impressions of justice towards the dismissing organization; this leads in turn to benefits for them: reduction of negative emotions, enhancement of their perceived well-being, future perspectives, and job-seeking activities - confirming the mediating role of overall justice. [less ▲]